Bluefish2009's Forum Posts | Swinging Heaven

Join the most popular community of UK swingers now

Bluefish2009

Over 90 days ago

Straight Male, 59

•

Straight Female, 49

UK

Profile Follows

Meets Parties Stories

Forum

12 Feb 2014

I would imagine there could be many reasons for flooding, changing weather patterns for one, global warming, which of coarse has been on going for over 11 million years since the last ice age and has nothing what so ever to do with man.
But in my view one of the largest causes is urbanisation, the more tarmac, concrete, paving slabs we put down the worse it will become
Off coarse it does not help building on flood plains as well

31 Oct 2013

OK, so does anyone still go dogging in the Blanfrod area, if so pm me please

31 Oct 2013

Quote by Bluefish2009
Hi guys, any one here know if this spot ever sees any action these days???
Google maps Mod edit: please don't post exact locations in the open forum. Keep it vague.

It is from your list on this site, as written on your site
This page
Blandford
http://www.swingingheaven.co.uk/dogging/locations/dorset-dogging.html

22 Oct 2013

Quote by MidsCouple24
Well I for one would not use a pub that did not provide adequate and discrete smoking facilities on the premises, I do not agree with standing outside on the public pavement making a mess with ciggie butts etc, here in Stoke that doesn't seem to happen much especially since it is illegal to drink alcohol in the street.
The regular club I use has a covered, heated smoking area out of sight of the passing public.
Anyone who sees people smoking in the street outside bars or clubs should report it to the council as unsocial behaviour, it may not be illegal but if councils get enough complaints they may act upon it or lobby MPs to regulate it.

I think for many pubs in town centres all over this country, the only frontage they might have is the pavement. Dont think I have seen alcohole consumed outside.
My feeling on this one is the pubs you mention seam to have gone to plenty of trouble to provide a smoking shelter. perhaps if they spent as much time and trouble keeping the toilets clean from puddles on the floor and vomit on the walls people would feel more comfertable. Also if they stopped serving the drunk people before they got out of hand that would be a bonus also.

21 Oct 2013

Quote by Lizaleanrob
we don't get a lot of buy on get one free in our local farm shop, but then we don't buy more than we need unless we get something like a sack of potatoes to which we just divide it with our immediate family.
i find supermarket veg bland and tasteless as i also do with their meat.
sorry but supermarkets are for those that can't make the time to shop properly and those that prefer convenience over taste and quality.

:thumbup:

21 Oct 2013

Quote by MidsCouple24
Sadly an average town centre pub in 21st Century Britain.

Lucky, not the norm here in our town, the main blite here seams to be the groups of smokers that hang around on the pavments outside the pubs, very menacing at times, especially for the older folk trying to get past on the pavement

21 Oct 2013

Quote by Lizaleanrob
Best of luck Stagger :thumbup: and other stuff

Sounds like a lovely pub lol

lol

welcome back blue its good to see you :thumbup:
Nice to see your still around Rob, hope Liz is well

21 Oct 2013

Hi guys, any one here know if this spot ever sees any action these days???
Google maps Mod edit: please don't post exact locations in the open forum. Keep it vague.

21 Oct 2013

Quote by MidsCouple24
Best of luck Stagger :thumbup:
I would like to give up smoking, I even have enough willpower to do it, alone, but Sasha doesn't and my willpower does not extend to giving up while living in a house where someone else smokes, I encourage her to give up, she is my partner and it is not good for us, not some random person on a swingers site whose daily habits are none of my business since they don't affect me.
That said, I enjoy smoking and have done for over 40 years, it helps control my weight, it calms me down at times of stress, it relaxes me at other times, without smoking I get aggressive, yes this is a self inflicted condition caused by smoking but one which I now have, encouraged to smoke by the Government and advertising back in the day, neither the cigarette companies nor the Government are doing much to help me with the side effects of smoking, smoke free devices still contain nicotine so I would still be hooked on the substance.
My smoking has never cost the NHS a penny, perhaps it will in the future who knows, but I doubt at my age it will ever cost the NHS as much as teen binge drinking, the NHS, Police, Courts, Council clean up crews etc. Nor will it have as much impact on the general public even in the days of passive smoking as will unsocial behaviour. It will never make me violent towards others nor will it make me commit acts of vandalism or bloody mindedness.
At a bar on Saturday night it wasn't my smoking that made walking into the gents like walking into a paddling pool, nor was it the reason the toilet and walls to be covered in puke, unlike many in the bar I wasn't over loud or bumping into people, others in the bar did not have to step lightly around me in fear of me becoming aggressive towards them nor did they have to listen to ramble on unintelligibly while outside smoking as did I.
The Police did not have to attend the bar because I am a smoker but they did turn up to deal with some drunken guys.
The bar did not have to employ the bouncers for fear of what I might do.
And that was just one normal night in one normal bar.
The NHS has not had to employ extra staff to man the half a million pound over sized ambulance specially ordered to cater for obese people on my behalf nor have they had to pay for extra sized hospital beds in case I should need one.
Binge drinking and obesity are accepted by society as "the norm", everyday life, smoking has made me a pariah subjected to abuse with people thinking it is acceptable to ridicule me as a smoker saying I do it to "look glamorous".

Sounds like a lovely pub lol

lol

1 Apr 2013

Eat the dogs

8 Mar 2013

Hi, looking for a single male who can accom on friday evening, tonight for a few hours of naughty fun. have a good read of our profile and if your interested message us
Dorchester, poole, bournmouth, Blandford Forum areas

23 Feb 2013

13 Feb 2013

Quote by foxylady2209
Firstly I am no expert, but believe religious book have been written and rewritten over thousands of years, mainly to steer the followers in the direction the writers wished.
Scripture has been removed from the bible many time to suit the writers or leaders
I feel it should be able to evolve, it must evolve or die

But surely that means religions are the work of people not any gods so they are agreeing that their religion is just make-believe?
At some point they have to face that truth

12 Feb 2013

Quote by Rogue_Trader
I dont agree, I firmly believe a hands off approach to countryside management is a thing of the past and due to human intervention impossible to achieve

I agree that hands-on management is important, but only in some respects. Foxes do not need management by huntsman with dogs.
I guess that where we must differ then :thumbup:

12 Feb 2013

Quote by starlightcouple

I am pleased you like me, the feeling is mutual. You do seam a little obsessed by this hunting business and the rabid dogs though. You may relax a little as the hounds are not rabid. However, I am not sure that my support of this excellent method of fox control should render my comments foundation-less

Blue I am aware that the dogs are not rabid, maybe the huntsmen are ? lol

lol

There is another member who takes what I say to such a literal degree. I wonder if I said it was raining cats and dogs, he would look out of his window and reply it is not. blink

blink

You could have a point, I have met a few huntsmen I would not pee on if they were on fire :thumbup:

12 Feb 2013

Quote by flower411

Star ....I am aware of what I do in the upbringing of my daughter . There are risks in life and the worst thing we could do is wrap our children in cotton wool trying to protect them from a world that doesn`t care .
I weigh risk against experience and I look at odds .....
I am aware of the mirriad of threats that she will face in life and I do my best to protect and perpare her for life without me ...
Can you say the same ?

Of course I can say the same but as a responsible parent I would try and alleviate as many risks as possible. I would not sit idly by and watch one of my kids make a mistake that I could prevent them from making, just so I can feel proud I have allowed them to find that mistake out for themselves. That in my eyes would be foolish and foolhardy of me, and more than anything not something many parents would do.
Nor would I idly sit by and allow them to eat horse that had come from an unreliable source as we are now finding out, and that meat may well contain chemicals harmful to humans. Apart from yourself I would doubt many parents would sit by knowing what we now know, and watch their kids eat it, even though it would mean wrapping them back up in that cotton wool. I would rather take away that possible risk that now could be there. We know for sure that there is in some cases 100% horse meat in products clearly labelled as being beef. We also know that this meat is coming from a very unreliable source in a third world country that is Romania. It would be bloody downright foolish and seriously irresponsible to eat it let alone allow your kids to. This is the tip of a nasty iceberg, and God knows where it will end.
I as a parent try and teach my kids about the risks of all kinds of things, and I would never sit back and watch them openly make one if I could in any way prevent it. Nor would I suspect many others would either.
There is no proof that the horse meat comes from unreliable sources .
There is no proof that there is anything dangerous to health in the meat.
There is no proof of anything at except that horse has been labelled as beef.
I am not controlled by the sensationalist media Star , you so clearly are !
If my daughter ingested a tiny amount of diluted Bute that has entered the food chain through bad practice I am confident that it will do her less harm than a multitude of stuff that I`m certain you are unaware of because the Daily Mail hasn`t warned you about it yet.
I can sleep at night because I am aware ....you sleep at night because you are unaware .
I would hazard that your daughter may be more likely to be bitten by a rabid fox than damaged by Bute lol

lol

12 Feb 2013

Firstly I am no expert, but believe religious book have been written and rewritten over thousands of years, mainly to steer the followers in the direction the writers wished.
Scripture has been removed from the bible many time to suit the writers or leaders
I feel it should be able to evolve, it must evolve or die

12 Feb 2013

Quote by Rogue_Trader
Nature does not control the fox as such, firstly he is not native and has no predator other than man, the only way nature will control foxes is through starvation

I just had to take you to task on this one sentence...the fox has been here so long he is a native species. He is a territorial animal and it takes a certain number of acres to support one animal.
There can not be two animals in the same area only one. Nature controls through starvation is fine. Nature does that to every predator. This is why predators are fewer in number than their prey.
Simple maths really. Nature is a balancer. We should leave it at that and stop meddling.
I dont agree, I firmly believe a hands of approach to countryside management is a thing of the past and due to human intervention impossible to achieve

12 Feb 2013

Quote by Trevaunance
The trouble with a debate on fox hunting is not just the emotive nature, but there is very little in the way of an unbiased view from the middle ground.
People will often have there views from one of the two entrenched sides of the debate. As an example, in this case blue you have quoted from the 'Masters of foxhounds association' website, so it is hard for people to not see that in an unbiased way.

Maybe so, and I do see you point, but the facts they quote on shooting are not there own facts and can be found in government reports and peer reveiwed papers if you wish

12 Feb 2013

Quote by starlightcouple
Blue is a bird that fly's in the sky out there in the world we live in, a wild animal or not>?? It is only different because that feeds your argument to say so. A wild bird causes all sorts of mess and was that not the reason people are now banned from feeding the Pigeons in Trafalgar Square?

Most birds are not large enough to cause damage, so yes the difference is massive, a few do cause people a little panic though at times, geese, swans, gulls etc. Banned from feeding pigeons you say, very wise move, lets extend this sensible move to other creatures

Quote by starlightcouple
What a complete load of old cobblers Blue. Foxes have been around for.......ermmm.......a thousand years ya reckon? How many attacks on small children Blue in that time? You are more at risk of falling down a mountain with Victoria Wood wearing stockings and suspenders, as you are of having a child attacked by a fox.:bounce:

Firstly foxes habits have changed in more recent years, this is plain to see by the sign and rise of these attacks. This is some thing we should take into account I feel. Risk is a difficult thing to measure, I bet you would not risk trotting that one out in front of the little boys family for a day or two. lol

lol

On top of that does the infrequency make it less important? I think not

Quote by starlightcouple
Where Blue do you get this rubbish from? I really like you Blue, I usually think your comments on here are reasoned well thought out, but this time you have been on the funny tobacco my friend. Coming from someone who openly supports the killing of foxes by rabid dogs, hunting in a pack and to rip a fox apart whilst still alive, your comments hold no foundation at all.

I am pleased you like me, the feeling is mutual. You do seam a little obsessed by this hunting business and the rabid dogs though. You may relax a little as the hounds are not rabid. However, I am not sure that my support of this excellent method of fox control should render my comments foundation-less wink

wink

12 Feb 2013

Quote by Rogue_Trader
Well I will do you the honour of reading it all, including your links.
I thank you for going to great lengths to explain why you feel strongly its right.
I live in Devon, quite a rural area I think you will agree, and one which we don't hark back to nostalgia, through rose-tinted glasses.
If foxes are that much of a pest and I dispute that they are, then the quickest dispatch of any predator is by a gun. Professional hunters make more clean kills than bad and have a better clean up rate, as you admit that in most cases with hunting the fox gets away.
Now I have checked out further links which are in support of fox hunting with dogs and a very interesting statistic appeared. Since the ban there has been no increase in fox numbers. In fact it is static. This is because foxes are territorial and the land only supports a certain number for the acreage.
Hunting doesn't control foxes, the ban doesn't control foxes...nature controls foxes. This isn't subjective like your diatribe its objective from the statistics you have provided.
If you farm/small holding suffers fox or badger then I suggest you want to re-design your pen or coup. If you would like I can show you pictures and drawings of how mine are protected with steel mesh going 12" into the ground and extending 24" out to prevent digging.
We also make sure ours are couped before dark.

The fox may be easy to keep from a small holding, much more difficult in large farms where and uplands where animals are not fenced at all, or from game birds who can not be fenced once released.
Yes the hunted fox is meant to get away, but the sick and old one will not, a bonus of hunting that is not available to the gun.
There is no real ban as such, fox hunting continues but with silly restricctions
Nature does not control the fox as such, firstly he is not native and has no preditor other than man, the only way nature will control foxes is through starvation
Further info on shooting;
with rifles.
It needs a high calibre rifle (i.e. over .22) used by a skilled marksman in ideal conditions. It is vital that the fox is visually identified as the target species; is stationary; that the marksman has sufficient time to take proper aim; and that he has an unobstructed view of the fox.
It is only practical for large scale control when carried out at night from a vehicle (hence vehicular access is necessary) with a lamp and whistle to “call up” foxes, but foxes soon become lamp shy. “At night” means anti-social hours, involving more than one person. Fox Control in the Countryside (GCT 2000) suggests a strike rate of “0.2 to 0.6 foxes per hour” which with 2 men equates up to 10 man hours per kill.
Suitability is limited because it cannot be used, even in many rural areas, due to the danger from stray bullets and ricochets (a high velocity bullet can kill at up to 3 miles). The dangers, whether on open moorland or where people, animals, cars or buildings may be concealed from view, are obvious.
A clean kill can never be guaranteed, even by a skilled marksman. Not all who use this method are skilled marksmen, and when unskilled marksmen use rifles, the risk of wounding is high. Skilled marksmen would have to be trained and paid for if other control methods are banned or restricted.
When wounding does occur, it can be assumed that the fox?s suffering is prolonged and intense, even if it recovers but the more so if it dies from its wounds or starvation.
with shotguns.
Wounding occurs frequently because the killing power of shotguns decreases exponentially at ranges above 20 yards. The risk of wounding increases correspondingly even for a well aimed shot.
Foxes are likely to be shot when moving which presents a more difficult target and less time to aim. When they are moving away from the shooter, which is frequently the case, foxes are especially vulnerable to being wounded as they will be shot at from behind.
“Wounding Rates in Shooting Foxes? peer reviewed and published in Animal Welfare (May 06) concluded that “there was no (shooting) regime that had no probability of wounding, a factor that varied dramatically with gun-type, ammunition and range. ” Wounding rates were much higher than previously claimed ? up to 50% in some cases.
Scott Henderson reported: “ It is significant that the RSPCA consider that the cruelty involved in shooting foxes is such as to make it an unsatisfactory substitute for hunting and that they would prefer hunting (to which they are naturally opposed on ethical grounds) if its abolition were likely to lead to an increase in the amount of shooting” and concluded “
We have no hesitation in saying that, unless very great care is taken, shooting may be an extremely cruel method of control”.
Following the Scott Henderson Report, the RSPCA issued its own policy statement on hunting which, after minor adjustment, was adapted at its 1958 AGM. The RSPCA?s position was that: “Control of foxes was necessary, hunting was the least cruel method, cruelty, not ethics, was the primary consideration”. Nothing has occurred since to justify any change in the RSPCA?s position. 50 years later Lord Burns: “We are less confident that the use of shotguns particularly in daylight, is preferable (to hunting) from a welfare perspective”.
The Phelps report 1997 (para.8.8.4) referred to the concerns of gamekeepers on “the increasing tendency for ‘illicit’ lamping carried out by irresponsible amateurs being a significant and rising source of cruelty due to the high proportion of foxes that are inexpertly shot and escape wounded”.
Shooting is often opportune and indiscriminate. It may occur at any time of the year and may cause young to starve when vixens are shot. No distinction is made between fit and less fit animals - all are equally likely to be shot. Intensity of control is dependent on random factors, such as the attitude of individual landowners. In many areas foxes could be wiped out by indiscriminate shooting if farmers and landowners are denied the free service provided by hunts.
I shall leave it at that, I suspect that you have your view and I mine and never the twain shall meat, as is often the case in these emotive dbates. I do thank you however for your reply, politness and taking the time to read my ramblings :thumbup:

12 Feb 2013

Quote by GnV
I had a very nice Waitrose British beef ( apparently ) for my dinner tonight.
I have to say it tasted delicious and I cleared my plate. Did it taste like beef? Who knows as it was masked by the pasta and herbs in it, but if I start trying to jump over my garden fence in the morning, I know what I have eaten.

Breaking news announced on SkyNews this evening.
Waitrose now admit that their beef meatballs have been found to contain pork....
No there the dog bollox :lol:

12 Feb 2013

Quote by Rogue_Trader
I cant see it helping their cause
I think hunting has a place in this century and the next, but that is for another thread

I hope it won't help their cause at all, as I don't feel hunting has any place in a civilised country such as ours, but as you say that's for another thread.
I believe it does have a place in this century. I do understand why people may think this way, but believe they are wrong. The first thing many will ask me Is control required at all? I will try to answer this as best I can
Of coarse a lot of what drives my passion for the subject is my past. I grew up in a small village close to a local hunt. My grandfather, who was a farrier and farmer, was heavily involved in all matters of the countryside. Every Sunday morning I would be woken by the rhythmic tapping of hammer on anvil. My childhood best friend's father was the terrier man for the local hunt. This meant I grew up around people with vast knowledge of the countryside, hunting, and countryside matters. These were people from many generations before me, who have life experience and knowledge passed down to them. Just like when I started work as an apprentice engineer as a young man, a far more experienced person showed me the ropes and advised by way of his experience. I took his advice because he had experience in these matters, so when older generation's and trusted family members extolled the virtues of countryside management and fox hunting I had no reason not to believe them.
I know of coarse no one here will trust my word on this matter, but proof is not easy to show. But below are some examples that hold some weight.
During World War 2 there was much less hunting. The fox population soared and predation of lambs, piglets, chickens etc. became intolerable to many farmer's and land owner's. The Government offered a bounty for dead foxes and encouraged shooting to bring down numbers. Farmers took up their shotguns and "Fox destruction clubs" were formed. They used dogs to flush out foxes which were then shot at. Not dissimilar to what is happening now actually. Not all members of these Societies were accurate shots and many used shotguns. Many foxes were wounded rather than killed quickly. Not all wounded foxes were found by the dogs. Those that escaped often died slowly from their wounds. The Attlee Socialist Government faced pressures to remove the bounty and to rely on Hunting and shooting in a less unprofessional manner. However, the fact of a Socialist government had given more power to the Anti-Hunting Lobby and it pressed for a Ban on Hunting on the basis that it is cruel. Reasonably, the government set up an inquiry under two senior members of the legal profession. This has become known as the Scott-Henderson Inquiry
Their finding were clear, below, this sums them up for those of you with an interest

Nothing between now and then has changed, this view is as relevant now as then.
A more recent cessation of hunting took place from February 2001 to December 2001 due to foot and mouth disease, farmers across the UK reported a noticeable increase in fox numbers and the resultant predation took its toll. In a letter to the Federation of Welsh Packs, the Farmers Union of Wales said "All counties in Wales have reported an increase in fox numbers and predation since the Hunting Authorities commenced their voluntary ban on 22 February 2001. The Union's County Branches are receiving an increasing number of calls from farmers concerned at the effects of a protracted ban on fox control during the autumn period."
Make of that what you will, I know how I read it
Now as for the act of hunting its self, I see hunting with hounds as the best, in fact the finest method of fox control, not just for the farmer, landowner but for the fox and its long term well being as well. For me animal welfare is crucial.
Hunting with hounds is selective, by that I mean it will by its nature mainly catch the old, sick, and injured. Leaving the most healthy to escape and continue to pass on its genes. Most foxes hunted actually escape. This is good on many levels; firstly the most troublesome foxes are the old and sick, the ones who have been pushed out of there hunting territories by younger and fitter foxes. These displaced foxes are then often forced by hunger to look for the easy meal in the farmer's field or the keeper's pens. So hunting with hounds echo natures as close as we are ever likely to be able to get. So in summery, hunting with hounds is helping to maintain a healthy, genetically sound fox population. This can not be achieved by any other method of control.
Another important factor is hunting with hounds is none wounding, the fox is either caught, and killed swiftly, or escapes unharmed, again no other method can achieve this.(sertainly not shooting) Further more the hunt its self has a dispersing effect on the fox population leading to the many advantages of reducing areas of over concentration and renewing the gene pool.
There is of course a service that many hunts's provided to hill sheep farmers during lambing and other times. Often a farmer can experience a troublesome fox over several nights, in these cases the hunt would turn up early in the morning, take the hounds to the latest kill and then track the fox from that kill. Again no other method of fox control can do this.
Hunts also provide a service of removing fallen stock from the farmer, this is an excellent free service to the farmer and used to help feed the hounds.
As for the chase its self, the fox while being hunted is under no more stress than a rabbit being hunted by a fox, both are in comfortable surroundings and will not know death is approaching until the very last moment. I have read much academic work that has been done on this subject, rather than bore you all with that here, here is one of the most relevant papers written by persons of the Veterinary profession.

I will bore you all no further lol

lol

12 Feb 2013

Quote by Rogue_Trader
I cant see it helping their cause
I think hunting has a place in this century and the next, but that is for another thread

I hope it won't help their cause at all, as I don't feel hunting has any place in a civilised country such as ours, but as you say that's for another thread.
If I may Rogue-trader I shall repond to this in the "RSPCA court controversy" shortly thread, as that is riddled with hunting comment lol

lol

12 Feb 2013

Quote by starlightcouple
Have you never fed the birds then Minx? What about the ducks or Swans? Are these not wild animals? Or are they somehow different?

Very different indeed, those birds are not predator, and one could say most are small enough not to cause you or others harm if encouraged into your back garden.
But it is not your self you put at risk, it is your neighbour's in the surrounding area with very small children that you put at risk.
That is some thing each one of us must weigh up in our minds and make an informed decision on, a risk assessment if you like on our responsibility's to the wider community

12 Feb 2013

Quote by Rogue_Trader
Good article, this bit is the crux for me
“Vilifying foxes is not the answer,” says Bryant. “Educating people – to deter foxes humanely, and to stop feeding them – is

Rogue-trader, I can not see this helping the hunting bill in any way to be honest

I agree Bluefish I can not see it being repealed but;
"It has no place in 21st century Britain. The public needs to bear in mind that some press reporting is biased and aimed at overturning the fox-hunting ban, when really the UK needs to calmly consider a proper course of action.
Best wishes to the baby boy and his family.
Sources
Mirror
BBC"
Hence the cynic in me suggesting that there were dark forces at work manipulating the reporting to demonize Mr. Fox.
I cant see it helping there cause
I think hunting has a place in this century and the next, but that is for another thread

12 Feb 2013

Quote by flower411
What a a fabulous photo of an old butchers shop blue. Our local butcher where we used to live in the UK before we came here was the exact same layout. The only difference was old John, the butcher wore a white apron which was invariably stained in (presumably) animal blood if only to remind customers of what his stock-in-trade was!
So sad all these old butcher shops are now all but gone in the new sanitised, pasteurised age in which we are compelled to live these days.

Don`t despair !! There are still real reputable butchers and I`m sure some of them will thrive after this little fiasco .
If I went to my butcher and asked for horse I`m sure he would source it for me but I`m pretty certain that he wouldn`t try to sell me horse by pretending it was something else.
Let`s face it I trust him but on top of that any fines incurred for being found out doing otherwise would put him out of business. To Tesco and the other supermarkets any fines will just be a cost to be passed on to their customers.
We are luky to have an outstanding local butcher

12 Feb 2013

Quote by starlightcouple

In Bromley this week, concerned friends and neighbours are scouring the streets for the fox that savaged Denny.

Well they certainly will not find THAT fox in Bromley, will they Minx? lol

lol

Quote by Theladyisaminx
Maybe we should call a cull on people that feed them to save the foxes.

You be on the telephone to your best bud Flower AGAIN? rolleyes

rolleyes

Your obviously playing that same record together.
These so called ' experts ' in so many other things end up saying one thing, and then changing their stories when their so called expertise is proved by another ' expert ' to be a complete load of old bollocks.
Until someone comes along and calls for it to become illegal through a law past by a Government, that makes it illegal to feed foxes, I shall continue to do as I please in my own back garden. I feed foxes and seem to be the bad guy in the eyes of these so called experts on here, and yet every Sunday hounds being led by tossers on horse back, set the dogs onto defenseless foxes in the name of sport, and then the hounds rip it to pieces whilst it is still alive.
Have a read up of the so called experts decisions of the culling of Badgers, one states one thing and somebody else states the opposite, and now the cull has been suspended whilst yet more ' experts ' look into it FFS. I asked you to shout louder earlier Minx with regards to am I doing anything illegal, and I never heard a dicky bird. Try again.:bounce:
Surely you dont need an expert to tell you that feeding a fox is a bad adea, just like the short sighted behavour of people that feed gulls

12 Feb 2013

Good article, this bit is the crux for me
“Vilifying foxes is not the answer,” says Bryant. “Educating people – to deter foxes humanely, and to stop feeding them – is

Rogue-trader, I can not see this helping the hunting bill in any way to be honest

11 Feb 2013

Quote by GnV
So many people have lost touch and forgotten that the meat was once an animal at all

That reminds me of something from over 35 years ago....
My young nephews were visiting us with their parents. At the time, we lived in a huge pea growing area in east anglia and they lived ooop norf around Manchester.
We proposed going to a pea farm to buy some pods for shelling and freezing taking the boys with us (who were about 8 at the time) but their mother (my SIL) looked absolutely horrified! "Absolutely not" she said." They'd be mortified if they found out that peas don't come from tins!" She added "they'll probably never eat peas again if they found out"
Great story Gnv lol

lol

A similar story happened to me many years ago, I had, at the time ferreting rights to keep the rabbit population down on a local council owned picnic area.
At the end of the morning I had about 10 or so rabbits, hocked through the back legs,and hung over a fence near the land-rover for the meat to cool. I was approached by the council on the Monday to ask if I could be more discreet with the rabbits as there had been a complaint. A person had been walking there dog with there young son, who it seams had been very badly distressed by seeing the dead rabbits. I bet they went from there to the local supermarket and walked through a whole isle of dead animals without a single thought.
The world has gone mad, people have forgotten